that's because the economy is a cause and effect that spans many administrations, I don't live in an election year bubble mags..
When are you going to get it through your head that I don't agree with you and Denny on that? I've already said no. I'm DONE answering that question...
The debate wasn't about how things happened or how they could change. It was about a statement that was entirely false. The economy when Reagan took office was much much worse than when Obama took office and that's 100% fact
Check out his record as governor of California...he went to war with his own population and would've put you in prison for eating mushrooms or smoking pot but if mags thinks that didn't hurt the economy, it's baffling
That's all I need to hear. You are dead wrong and haven't given one shred of proof that the economy was worse when Obama took office than Reagan.
Nice bait and switch. Also, it's even more laughable that you won't give credit to a president when they do good because they don't run the country, then use that same argument for when they do bad. A governor is in the same position as the president for the state. You're cute!
Debate police? When the opposing view has not used a single stat to warrant their view, then it's easy to expose it
http://www.shmoop.com/reagan-era/economy.html Mags shoots, mag scores, dviss loses in a heart breaker bullshit @dviss1 Here is what I posted
